Search for: "United States v. Mark"
Results 281 - 300
of 9,030
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
8 Jun 2011, 7:50 am
This notice is not expedient enough to provide the United States with sufficient time to protect its interests, and is not directed to the Department of Justice -- the agency responsible for representing the United States’ interests in a false marking suit. . . . [read post]
17 Oct 2023, 7:47 am
Case date: 14 August 2023 Case number: No. 22-1839 Court: United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit A full summary of this case has been published on Kluwer IP Law. [read post]
1 May 2009, 11:36 am
Furthermore, while Section 44 was “generally intended” to implement elements of the Paris Convention, In re Rath, 402 F.3d at 1207, 74 USPQ2d at 1177, it does not, through subsections 44(b) or (h) or otherwise, provide the user of an assertedly famous foreign trademark with an independent basis for cancellation in a Board proceeding, absent use of the mark in the United States. [read post]
26 Oct 2010, 7:08 am
" United States of America, ex rel. et. al. v. [read post]
3 Jan 2013, 5:00 am
The Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America v. [read post]
27 Jun 2018, 1:06 pm
The United States Supreme Court held that the State’s extraction of agency fees from nonconsenting public-sector employees violated the First Amendment, overruling its earlier decision in Abood v Detroit Board of Education, 431 U. [read post]
5 Mar 2020, 6:40 am
To prove such an intention, a party must show that "its activities are those that a reasonable businessman with a bona fide intent to use the mark in United States would have undertaken. [read post]
14 Apr 2015, 4:50 pm
States. [read post]
25 Mar 2016, 5:17 am
Belmora LLC v. [read post]
5 Apr 2013, 3:00 pm
By Eric Goldman United States v. [read post]
5 Oct 2015, 1:54 pm
Today marks the beginning of the United States Supreme Court’s 2015-2016 Term, and coincidentally it also marked my participation in an annual event at the Marquette University Law School entitled “Supreme Court Roundup. [read post]
Bond v. United States: SCOTUS Interprets Criminal Statute Narrowly to Preserve Federal-State Balance
3 Jun 2014, 9:23 am
Congress passed the Implementation Act in 1998 in order to give the Convention effect in the United States. [read post]
4 Mar 2010, 5:15 am
United States v. [read post]
18 Dec 2010, 11:50 am
The United States appears to have a few ‘issues’ with judicial systems that do not fall within their control. [read post]
24 Apr 2009, 3:30 am
" Petitioner Bayer uses the same mark in countries other than the United States for the same product. [read post]
7 May 2008, 12:37 pm
The season ended with a particularly interesting argument in United States v. [read post]
4 Jun 2015, 3:00 am
Today marks the 87th anniversary of the landmark Olmstead v. [read post]
9 Feb 2015, 3:06 am
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia reversed the TTAB's ruling in Bayer Consumer Care AG v. [read post]
24 Jun 2011, 4:37 pm
FLFMC, LLC v. [read post]
23 Apr 2014, 1:21 pm
Baringer; James R BullmanSource of Law: United StatesLouisianaVerdict or Settlement Amount: N/ALegal Claims: Trademark InfringementCourt Name: United States District Court, Middle District of LouisianaLegal Counsel: Stephen G. [read post]
